DEFINING THE DIVINE
Now , while we cannot avoid the necessity for defining the divine / supernatural — indeed , while no conversation about mind control , occultism , the modern legal system , or any of its components can avoid this necessity — it must also be said that this in no way is the same act as interpreting its Will . In other words , to positively identify the Divine is entirely distinct from the act of claiming that the Divine “ said this ” or “ wants that .”
Despite the fact that numerous cults and religions have savagely battled with each over who holds favor with “ God / the Divine ” for several millennia , it doesn ’ t detract in any way from the fact that they all agree on defining the Divine in some sense as the generative / creative source of existence as we know it . You will find no deviation from this in any theological model anywhere in history , today , or in any future . Furthermore , while many may claim to interpret the Will of the Divine in diverse ways , those who attempt to do so self-evidently all agree that the Divine must have a Will in the first place , and that means that they all agree on some level that the Divine is / has a unique Mind unto itself . Lastly , it is also generally agreed that the Divine possesses the attributes of omnipotence , omniscience , and omnipresence — otherwise , how could the Divine possibly have created the universe ? If the Divine created existence itself , then the divine is omnipotent ; and if the Divine is omnipotent , then it must in some sense be aware of everything it creates , hence it is omniscient ; and lastly , if it is omniscient , then the Divine cannot help but possess present-moment-awareness of absolutely everything in creation , hence it is omnipresent as well . Therefore , we hope to step on very few toes when we define the Divine in the following way : “ the omnipotent , omniscient , and omnipresent Mind that created and , in some sense , transcends and , at the same time , interacts with all material existence .”
To be sure , there are numerous paradoxes associated with the Divine not sufficiently addressed in the above paragraph , however this is sufficiently logical and complete for our purposes in this article . The main point here is that we have disambiguated the concept of the Divine sufficiently to determine that 1 ) it is singular , 2 ) it can be described as the source of creation , and 3 ) it is intimately involved in some sense with the processes and events within creation . No matter what anyone may say about the Divine , these three characteristics tend to be universally applied to the idea , and , most importantly , their existence suggests that the Divine is neither aloof nor indifferent to creation .
OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DIVINE
If the Divine “ interacts ” with creation , then that suggests a dynamic relationship exists between the Divine and ourselves as conscious , aware Beings within creation . Thus , the “ omnipotence ” of the Divine is in its ability to create , but not necessarily to control . A better word to describe this would be “ omni-communicative ,” meaning that the Divine is in constant communication — in some sense — with all of creation , but only as a consultant , and not as a dictator . If indeed the Divine created the world , then the world itself could be said to be built out of “ Divine Will ,” and this in turn would mean that the world is fundamentally made of “ Will-in-motion .” Thus , when a “ unit of will ” is formed , it inherits and possesses , to some degree , the same quality of “ will ” that created it . And since , by definition , Divine Will cannot abrogate Divine Will , it would be consistent to postulate that the Divine is fundamentally
TheSovereignVoice . Org